Gay Jargon
In recent years, the public view towards homosexuality has been at the forefront of political discourse in the United States. Gay marriage, employee benefits, political correctness, and many other important issues have been presented for public discourse. No matter what our personal opinions tend to be on these subjects, they all tend to relate back to a single issue: definitions. What is the definition of marriage? Who decides which meaning is the correct definition? Can a long-accepted definition be modified to better fit the current societal definition? All of these questions are difficult to answer, hence the seemingly endless array of media coverage, political banter, and dialogue within our very own lives. Recently, one such topic has been the usage of the word ?gay? in our everyday language.
The English language is a living language. The usage of specific words, pronunciations, and even the meanings of words are constantly changing. A century ago, the word ?gay? was accepted to mean ?merry,? ?joyous,? or ?glad.? Even today, this remains the primary definition found in all major dictionaries. Of course, we all know that the word ?gay? has come to have many other meanings. Most notably, it has progressed into the politically correct word for ?homosexual.? The roots of this specific meaning can be traced back to Victorian England, where female and male prostitutes were called ?gay.? However, it wasn?t until the 1920?s that the sexual meaning was directly applied to homosexual males. By the 1980?s, the usage of ?gay? as a replacement for ?homosexual? became widespread, forever dowsing the original meaning into the annals of the spoken English language.
Today, the word ?gay? seems to be taking on an entirely new meaning. Rather than the most recent sexual definition, it has become a slang word meaning ?inferior? and ?stupid.? In recent months, this seemingly natural progression of language has been met with widespread opposition, most notably from homosexuals. As a result, a sort of societal movement has begun to form in order to combat the widespread use of ?gay? as what many consider to be a derogatory term. From college campuses to corporate offices, the use of the word ?gay? in any manner other than as a substitute for ?homosexual? is met with disdain from numerous individuals, most notably those in administrative positions.
Many adversaries claim that this recent slang adaptation of ?gay? is hurtful to the homosexual community. They seem to believe that since ?gay? is used as a replacement for ?stupid,? this infers that homosexuals and homosexuality must also be inferior. Although one could argue that the slang definition has become so commonplace that most people do not even consider this connection while using it, I argue that it doesn?t matter. Let?s assume that the members of the populace that use the word ?gay? to mean ?stupid? truly believe that homosexuality is inferior. Is it not their right as a citizen of the United States to hold this conviction? Whether or not an outside party agrees or disagrees is completely irrelevant. If homosexuals find this truth to be hurtful, that is a personal issue, not a societal problem.
Other than the issue of possible hurt feelings, the only other plausible explanation for being against the evolution of the meaning of the word ?gay? in our everyday language is the desire to resist change. Let?s face it: for the past twenty years or so, the goal of most homosexuals in the United States has been to gain acceptance for their sexuality and lifestyle. This was the primary basis for the increase in homosexual awareness during the 1980?s, and remains one of the top guiding factors in modern day gay-related issues. As a result, it?s no surprise that homosexuals and homosexual sympathizers see the latest slang usage of ?gay? as a possible threat to their cause rather than a step forward in linguistic evolution. I, like many others, truly understand this sentiment. However, limiting the word usage of others is not a viable solution to this supposed problem.
I don?t use profanity in my language. Sure I may tell a joke or quote another work that involves a swear word, but I don?t see the value in using profanity in everyday discourse. However, when others use profanity, I do not get offended, or try to limit their use of swear words. Similarly, if one feels that it is hurtful to the homosexual community to use the word ?gay? rather than ?stupid,? then by all means, he/she has every right to refrain from doing so. However, just because he/she has decided to make the conscious decision to adjust his/her usage of specific words doesn?t mean that everyone else should do the same. I don?t think that majority of you would limit your use of swear words if I asked you to do so, so please don?t ask me, or anyone else for that matter, to do the same with other words that you may disagree with.
Before anyone gets the idea that I am anti-homosexuals (or homophobic, as it has come to be known), consider this: I also believe that this tenet should be applied to many other words used in the English language. Take, for example, the racially explosive expressions in our society, including ?great person,? ?my lover,? ?beloved patriot,? and ?cracker.? I, like many others, choose not to use them in our language. However, that does not make our decision the correct assessment, nor does it disqualify the opposing opinions.
If anyone disagrees with my opinion in the previous paragraphs, I urge him/her to come forward and answer the following questions:
What is the definition of ?gay??
Who decides which meaning is the correct definition?
Can a long-accepted definition be modified to better fit the current societal definition?
Why is it that some progressions of language are deemed acceptable in our society, while others are not?
We all need to realize that English language is alive and thriving. As such, it is always changing. However, at the end of the day, language is nothing more than what each individual makes it to be. I think Lewis Carroll said it best in his book, Through the Looking Glass:
?When I use a word,? Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ?it means just what I choose it to mean ? neither more nor less.?
?The question is,? said Alice, ?whether you can make words mean so many different things.?
?The question is,? said Humpty Dumpty, ?which is to be master ? that's all.?
We have a choice: we can either allow trivial definitions to determine our course of actions, or we can live our lives to the fullest regardless of what others say and do. I, for one, certainly will not allow my lexis or the language of others to control my life; and I highly suggest that others try to do the same. After all, they?re only words.
